Social determinants of Health

Post has two assignments

1.:Pill testing/drug checking (that is, allowing people to test the contents of their ecstasy pills). 2. Soft drink tax. 3. Indigenous school attendance/school completion. 4. Renewable energy

Order Description

Scenario: For this assessment, imagine that there is currently a parliamentary inquiry into each of the four issues below. You, as an engaged citizen and someone knowledgeable about health, have decided to make a submission.

Task: Choose one of the health issues below and write an evidence-based parliamentary submission. Your submission should be making a clear link to relevant social determinants of health (that is, you’re arguing for a position and linking it to the SDOH). From there, you should provide a policy recommendation(s) – what is it that should be done to make the policy healthier?

Length: Your submission work is to be approximately 2000-2500 words [+/- 10%; references are not included in the word count]).

The following health topics are those the government is having an ‘inquiry’ into::

1. Pill testing/drug checking (that is, allowing people to test the contents of their ecstasy pills).

2. Soft drink tax.

3. Indigenous school attendance/school completion.

4. Renewable energy.

Layout: There is no set layout for a parliamentary submission. I have provided three examples from a quick online search, and you’re welcome to follow one of those or find your own. You want it to look professional, however, so keep that in mind. You also want it to be evidence-based, so referencing is important.>>>>
This assessment task requires you to consider how we can make policies‘healthier’. You will choose one topic listed on CloudDeakin and write aparliamentary submission, putting forth an evidence-based argumenton how current policy should be made healthier (linking to relevant socialdeterminants of health).More information about this assessment will be provided on the CloudDeakinsite for this unit

Instructions In Week 3 we will be looking at the concept of Health in All Policies (HiAP). Scenario: For this assessment, imagine that there is currently a parliamentary inquiry into each of the four issues below. You, as an engaged citizen and someone knowledgeable about health, have decided to make a submission. Task: Choose one of the health issues below and write an evidence-based parliamentary submission. Your submission should be making a clear link to relevant social determinants of health (that is, you’re arguing for a position and linking it to the SDOH). From there, you should provide a policy recommendation(s) – what is it that should be done to make the policy healthier? Length: Your submission work is to be approximately 2000-2500 words [+/- 10%; references are not included in the word count]). The following health topics are those the government is having an ‘inquiry’ into:: 1. Pill testing/drug checking (that is, allowing people to test the contents of their ecstasy pills). 2. Soft drink tax. 3. Indigenous school attendance/school completion. 4. Renewable energy. Layout: There is no set layout for a parliamentary submission. I have provided three examples from a quick online search, and you’re welcome to follow one of those or find your own. You want it to look professional, however, so keep that in mind. You also want it to be evidence-based, so referencing is important. Due Date and Submission Process

pleas choose only 1 topic from 4 topics.i already send you all the documents.references are 24 required in Harvard style.please msks s good one.i already fail this unit.have a look on the marking rubric and examples of parliamentary submissions.thanks.please choose only one topic and let me know thanks.these are the 4 topics as follows.please choose one thanks.lease needs no plagirism at all.thanks 1. Pill testing/drug checking (that is, allowing people to test the contents of their ecstasy pills). 2. Soft drink tax. 3. Indigenous school attendance/school completion. 4. Renewable energy.

leace choose 1 topic.not all. ASSESSMENT CRITERIA (TOTAL MARKS 50) High distinction Distinction Credit Pass Not satisfactory Social Determinants of Health (SDOH) (15) Relevant social determinants of health should be discussed with relation to the topic you have chosen. The SDOH should be appropriate for the chosen topic. A clear link should be made between the topic and the SDOH determinants. The determinants should be logical and justified. The reader should be able to see the link between the topic, the determinants, and health. The discussion is evidence-based. An excellent evidence-based explanation, discussion, and justification of the chosen SDOH. The SDOH are clearly appropriate for the policy scenario. There is an excellent, clear link between the SDOH, the policy, and health. A good evidence-based explanation, discussion, and justification of the chosen SDOH. The SDOH are appropriate for the policy scenario. There is a good, clear link between the SDOH, the policy, and health. A good explanation, discussion, and justification of the chosen SDOH, though a weak evidence-base is drawn upon. The SDOH are mostly appropriate for the policy scenario. There is a link between the SDOH, the policy, and health. SDOH are chosen, though there is questionability of their appropriateness for the policy scenario. The evidence base is absent or lower quality evidence is used. There is some confusion between the SDOH, the policy, and health. The basic requirements of this element have not been met. High distinction Distinction Credit Pass Not satisfactory Policy recommendations (20) A clear set of policy recommendations are provided. They are fully-formed, explained, justified, and flow logically from the links made between the scenario and the SDOH discussed. The audience should be able to see the links between the scenario, the SDOH, and how these policy recommendations will make the scenario a ‘healthier’ policy. An excellent set of recommendations are provided. They are fully-formed, justified, flow logically, and there is an excellent link to the SDOH and the policy. The recommendations make the policy healthier. A good set of recommendations are provided. They are well-formed, the majority are justified, they flow logically, and there is a good link to the SDOH and the policy. The recommendations mostly make the policy healthier. A fair set of recommendations are provided. They are generally well-formed, with some justification. There is some confusion with the flow of logic. There is some link to the SDOH and the policy. Some recommendations make the policy healthier. A set of recommendations are provided, though there is some confusion with their explanation, discussion, or justification. There is some confusion with the link to the SDOH and the policy. Not all recommendations make the policy healthier. Basic requirements of the assessment have not been met. High distinction Distinction Credit Pass Not satisfactory Professionalism of writing and presentation (10) The assignment should be carefully edited, with no mistakes in your spelling, punctuation, syntax or grammar. Careful presentation of your wok is important to ensure accurate communication with the reader. Individual statements should be clearly articulated and sentences well-constructed and unambiguous. This allows the reader to focus on the meaning and the key messages of your arguments. The style of writing should be appropriate for an academic audience. Excellent standard of presentation; no mistakes in spelling, punctuation, syntax or grammar; language clearly and effectively communicates ideas; professional academic style and tone. Work is coherent, engaging and thoughtful. Generally very good standard of presentation; very occasional, minor errors that do not detract from meaning; language generally communicates ideas; an academic tone and level of argument is generally used. Generally good standard of presentation; minor, infrequent errors; communication faults which cause minor confusion or lack of clarity although the overall meaning remains fairly clear. A fair attempt at academic writing but some problems with the standard of presentation (spelling, punctuation, syntax, grammar or style); multiple errors, some of which distract from the communication of meaning; insufficient proof reading and editing. Work contains frequent, serious errors in spelling, punctuation, syntax or grammar; style is inconsistent or inappropriate. High distinction Distinction Credit Pass Not satisfactory Referencing (5) Referencing of source material allows the reader to assess how persuasive and credible your arguments are and builds the reader’s confidence that your arguments are based on evidence and not just anecdote or your own assumptions. Citations should be appropriately located in the text and fully detailed in a reference list, in a consistent and correct format (Harvard or APA). Excellent use of quality sources, integrated in the argument to develop ideas; no errors in referencing conventions. Good use of appropriate referenced materials to support key ideas; a good standard of referencing with few or minor errors in referencing conventions. A fair attempt at referencing, with few errors in referencing conventions; may use lower quality sources, or may under-reference ideas. Insufficient or inaccurate referencing. Severe or extensive under-referencing.

2:Argumentative Research Essay

write a 4-page essay that defends your thesis using literary elements. Submit an outline of your essay.The essay should defend the following prompt:
Prompt:
Many Authors write about the theme “If an individual does not follow the rules of society, there can be negative, sometimes violent, consequences.”
Which of the two stories portrays this theme most effectively? How?
Hint to success: Use three literary elements to support your answer. For example, “Dick portrays this theme most effectively through his use of tone, conflict, and characterization.”
Instructions:
-Read through all of the instructions for this assignment.
– Read all of the resources. (LINKS TO RESOURCES ARE BELOW)
– Select one of the two short stories to write about.
– Your audience for this essay are people who have read the stories.
– You need to use the Library resources or other search engines to collect at least two scholarly sources that will defend your thesis. One of these sources must defend your counterargument.
– Your essay will have the following components:
? An Introduction paragraph with a thesis
? The thesis at the end of the introduction that clearly states your position on which author most clearly portrays this theme.
? Three supporting sections of the body that defend your thesis
? Each section should incorporate both text support from the story and research support. Each quote, paraphrase or new information requires an in text citation.
– A paragraph for the counterargument
? The counterargument would be the main argument for the opposite of your thesis
? A concluding paragraph
Requirements:
Length and format: 4-pages.
The title page and reference page are also required, but they should not be factored into the 4-pages length of the essay.
It should also be double spaced, written in Times New Roman, in 12 point font and with 1 inch margins. Essay should conform to APA formatting and citation style.
Use the third-person, objective voice, avoiding personal pronouns such as “I,” “you,” “we,” etc.
Please use the above sources and any outside sources you need to create a properly-formatted APA reference page.
Use APA format for in-text citations and references when using outside sources and textual evidence.

Source Materials:
• “The Hanging Stranger” by Philip K. Dick
https://americanliterature.com/author/philip-k-dick/short-story/the-hanging-stranger

• “All Summer in a Day” by Ray Bradbury
http://www.btboces.org/Downloads/6_All%20Summer%20in%20a%20Day%20by%20Ray%20Bradbury.pdf

“Literary Analysis: Using Elements of Literature” by Roane State.
https://www.roanestate.edu/owl/elementslit.html

Pill testing